bladerunner wrote:
Johnson9.30 wrote:Anyone else's first time watching Opera?
You mean Oprah? It is mine. She's actually a very good interviewer. I don't think she has made this easy for him at all. In fact, she's asking all the questions I would have.
Naw, she didn't ask him the first person who introduced him to what doping could do; to why he had to do it to compete with those who were doing it.
Personally, I blame Lasse Viren and the Finns ;-)
This whole breakdown of the effort exerted to "get him" and final confession have really made me take a look at how I feel about doping. Don't get me wrong, I hate doping as much as the next person and I think it's ruined sports. The 100m is boring to me now.
But I had to take a step back because even though I knew all along LA was doping and argued with friends about how it didn't pass the smell test. That made me cynical in their eyes. But now years removed from the 2005 tour, nearly two decades of anti-doping people trying to finally catch their big trophy fish to gloat to the world about...I almost feel a bit of humanity for LA. Maybe I'm crazy...but watching the interview he was so close to saying what I had felt all along "everybody does it" (which he basically said by skipping around it). Or at least he felt everyone was doing it. That doesn't absolve him from cheating but it puts doping into perspective for me.
Let's say we have 100 tour riders half dope, half don't and we have designed an amazing system where we can catch 90% of all cheats (yea right lol). Awesome. But those 50 riders are going to take from 6th place back. They're going to be no names fighting for a career in the sport. So even if nearly everyone wasn't doping, or they were catching 90% of athletes, Lance is right. In his mind...everyone is doping. The top 5 finishers certainly are, and if you're in the sport you sort of have an inkling as to who is guilty.
What this says to me...is that even by going after athletes we're asymmetrically catching cheaters. Hell, Lance was a 20 year investigation to finally prove someone a fraud and it's one dude. Forget Landis or Contador or Hamilton or Ulrich. They were nearly all cheating. But what is the point of anti-doping if we're only catching a few? To feel good that we tried to catch them? Because we're certainly not catching them all (Hello Usain Bolt). And they're going to fight back and design new manners to beat these systems.
I guess my take away is.....is anti-doping really worth it? Unless you're going to catch everyone, why bother busting 1 or 2? Just to prove it sometimes work even as cheats still win?
Trialswatcher wrote:
Honestly, now I think how easy it was for Viren, Bekele Etc and so on
hate to tell folks, But this is not much different in T& F
There's something to this...until the testing got better.
trilby face wrote:
where is all this gonna end? Is there any possibility that he could lose everything....... There's so much entangled in lance Armstrong's lie.
Yeah, entangled and tragic for so many.
dorks wrote:
Lance out cheated a bunch of cheaters and pissed them off. who gives a F*ck. so much self righteousness.
Besides, everybody knew the whole time! Big surprise. Rick Reilly jumped on the pro Lance bandwagon (to get attention and more hits on his columns) knowing full well he was doping, and now pretends like hes been misled and hurt. Every single one of his sponsors, livestrong employees, teammates, race organizers etc all knew... if they say otherwise, they're stupid or lying. People who profited from his name want to distance themselves now... a bunch of frauds, like Lance.
Sadly, that is kind of how I've always felt.
I never thought Disneyland was real.
I always thought that pro cycling was dopers being beaten by other dopers.
Sadly.
what's the government's batting average now destroying athletes lives? .400?
marion - won, bonds - lost, clemens - lost x 2, lance - won
So will Lance get tried for perjury and sued for fraud?
+1
Patrick Fitzgerald wrote:
Rojo: One thing that comes into my mind is I'm pleasantly surprised that so many people are now coming out and ripping Lance
I'm glad it brings you joy. Perhaps you should lead an angry mob to his house and burn him at the stake!!!
Rojo: Like for me, Lance as a cheater was big this summer.
That's some crack investigative journalism. You really scooped this story!
Rojo: Why is Lance so adamant he didn't make others dope?
Grown men made the choice to dope or not. All of the affidavits confirmed that in order to be competitive, you had to dope. That was the culture of the sport well before Lance. Read "Breaking the Chain" about Festina in '98.
Rojo: Lance has a blood profile which meant that he benefitted way more from doping than others.
"The Secret Race" makes that claim. Because Lance's natural hermatocrit was well below the 50% threshold, he did benefit more from than riders with a naturally higher hermatocrit level.
Rojo: Most cycling insiders say he'd never have won a tour even if everyone was clean.
That's awfully speculative in light of the culture of the sport. The truth is there was no level playing field, but it's not as though Lance wasn't a talent. He was World Champion in '93.
Rojo: I know many think I'm over the top with my hatred of Lance
Did he steal your girlfriend? Or is it just jealousy?
Rojo: WHy wouldn't lance admit to Andrew hospital lie?
He admitted to doping. Betsy's testimony is vindicated.
Rojo: I wish Oprah had played the whore comment. Not sure if I've ever heard it.
She characterized the comment as "under the breath". He implied that Emma was sleeping with the riders and that was the reason she was fired.
Rojo: That was much better than I thought.
It was a great interview. Can't wait until tomorrow!
someone had to do it wrote:
Pewow wrote:Blood Doping wasn't illegal when Viren competed.
It sure as hell wasn't seen as okay to do either.
And by a police officer at that. A lying police officer.
He seems to have no compassion and seems to resemble many sociopaths in manor who have been interviewed after being caught.
It's not just cycling. Doping culture is the same in running.
Tommy2Nuttz wrote:
Rojo, this whole interview is a sham.
Think about this: hes the leader, and he wants the others to be sure to keep up with him. Its evident that the implication is that if the leader is doping the other better be. Besides, its safer for everyone if they are all doping. So its all a big lie. he was a jerk and a bully, so of course he demanded that they dope too.
Whats even more pathetic about this "interview" is that over 20min into it she hasn't even asked him when he first doped!
She doesn't know enough to ask him to take her thru a full calender year of when he was doping, how he got the drugs what he physically did, inject pop etc.
The "sham" fits the narrative, perfectly. One of the key things LA was honest about was his need to control everything. That hasn't changed. That's why he had O do the story, he didn't sit their and discuss this with some sports journalist who might control the dialog. He said flat out he'd not name names, he wouldn't discuss the call to Betsy A - which Oprah should TOTALLY have called him out on - he publicly abused her, he owes her, at the very least, a very public apology ..... He's still in COBOL. He chose the time, the place, the interviewer, etc.
Old habits die hard.
J.R. wrote:
A Duck wrote:The whole pro cycling sport was rotten to the core.
Cycling should be BANNED!
I think pro cycling should get a 5 year death penalty.
I also think the Olympic Movement should be disbanded. It no longer serves a purpose other than to line the pockets of a select elite -- they have former dopers as ambassadors for sure. And I also think the NCAA should be dis-banded.
Sprintgeezer wrote:
I repeat also:
The absolute hallmark of doping is continued stratospheric performance level, in elite competition.
It simply cannot be sustained naturally.
Armstrong, Merritt, Bolt, whatever.
Nonsense. Bolt is the perfect example of someone who does NOT maintain continued elevated performance. And you have been the first one to use those fluctuations as "evidence" of him doping. You're talking out both sides of your a$$.
Johnson9.30 wrote:
Anyone else's first time watching Opera?
And last. :)
TLW wrote:
It's not just cycling. Doping culture is the same in running.
TLW speaks the truth.
+1I just wish he felt free enough to say "When I got into the sport I found out it was the only way, because everyone was doing it, and if not, there were very few not doing it."
misewell b wrote:
This whole breakdown of the effort exerted to "get him" and final confession have really made me take a look at how I feel about doping. Don't get me wrong, I hate doping as much as the next person and I think it's ruined sports. The 100m is boring to me now.
But I had to take a step back because even though I knew all along LA was doping and argued with friends about how it didn't pass the smell test. That made me cynical in their eyes. But now years removed from the 2005 tour, nearly two decades of anti-doping people trying to finally catch their big trophy fish to gloat to the world about...I almost feel a bit of humanity for LA. Maybe I'm crazy...but watching the interview he was so close to saying what I had felt all along "everybody does it" (which he basically said by skipping around it). Or at least he felt everyone was doing it. That doesn't absolve him from cheating but it puts doping into perspective for me.
Let's say we have 100 tour riders half dope, half don't and we have designed an amazing system where we can catch 90% of all cheats (yea right lol). Awesome. But those 50 riders are going to take from 6th place back. They're going to be no names fighting for a career in the sport. So even if nearly everyone wasn't doping, or they were catching 90% of athletes, Lance is right. In his mind...everyone is doping. The top 5 finishers certainly are, and if you're in the sport you sort of have an inkling as to who is guilty.
What this says to me...is that even by going after athletes we're asymmetrically catching cheaters. Hell, Lance was a 20 year investigation to finally prove someone a fraud and it's one dude. Forget Landis or Contador or Hamilton or Ulrich. They were nearly all cheating. But what is the point of anti-doping if we're only catching a few? To feel good that we tried to catch them? Because we're certainly not catching them all (Hello Usain Bolt). And they're going to fight back and design new manners to beat these systems.
I guess my take away is.....is anti-doping really worth it? Unless you're going to catch everyone, why bother busting 1 or 2? Just to prove it sometimes work even as cheats still win?
wtfunny wrote:
Johnson9.30 wrote:Anyone else's first time watching Opera?
And last. :)
LOL. My favorite part was when Oprah asked him about suing Emma O'Reily and he was like "you know Oprah, we sued so many people that I honestly don't remember."
How about you just ban yourself as a fan, then everyone is happy. This may be difficult for you to accept, but pleasing your sensibilities is very low on the totem pole of things sport is concerned with.
Excellent post, sir.
And
Dojo, brojo, whatever your name is... Geez get some new software.